What do they mean by live action? Is it gonna have real people in too instead of being an animal world. Or is it gonna be Lion king photorealistic CGI for eveything?
What do they mean by live action? Is it gonna have real people in too instead of being an animal world. Or is it gonna be Lion king photorealistic CGI for eveything?
They can do anything they want with it yes, but again, if it was anyone but Disney releasing these movies, they would be sued for plagiarism. The original animators did all the scenes, all the dialogue and are getting jack all. Call me crazy, but I don' think that's right
They're not working on the new product (ie. the remake). Really, what is so hard to understand?
And work that they were paid for is being "lifted". Disney essentially bought a product from them.
Do they still get royalties from the original product?
There was over 265 animators/artists that worked on the original Lion King. Not to mention, if we go this route...the animators/artists probably aren't the only ones that would "deserve" any sort of compensation.
It's all but a re-release, with the scenes and dialogue simply moved to a different medium. It relies on the work and popularity of the first without giving any compensation to the first.
And as fa as the plots go, it is original because, again, it takes wholesale from the first. The myth that it was based on was verbal, and probably didn't have jokes written for Robin Williams.
If another studio released it, they would be sued for copyright infringement and plagiarism.
That’s. Because. The. Other. Studio. Doesn’t. Own. The. Original.
You’ve already admitted that Disney can do whatever they want with properties they own. Why do you keep bringing up this wholly hypothetical plagiarism scenario?m
Furthermore, I’m 100% certain that the animators wouldn’t be able to file a plagiarism suit; Disney would.
The people that made the product that Disney PAID them to make don’t own the product.
Last edited by Star_Jammer; 05-21-2019 at 07:00 AM.